The Green Party has been forced to correct its flagship election tax plan after admitting a mistake that overstated how much money the policy would raise by about $800 million over four years. The error landed days after the party unveiled what it called a tax system for all of us, and it has handed political opponents an easy line of attack in an election year already crowded with arguments about who can be trusted with the books.
The slip was simple in nature but awkward in timing. The Greens had budgeted extra money for Inland Revenue to administer and enforce the new taxes, costed at $100 million in 2027/28, rising to $102 million, then $104 million, then $106 million in the following years. That funding is a cost. In the published policy document it was mistakenly recorded as revenue, which inflated the bottom line. Once the figures were put back where they belonged, the net revenue for 2027/28 dropped from $5.347 billion to $5.147 billion, and the 2030/31 figure fell from $5.937 billion to $5.725 billion.
The mistake came to light after RNZ made enquiries on Monday morning. The party quietly re-uploaded the corrected document before issuing a press release just after midday describing the problem as a typo. Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick acknowledged the error on Midday Report and did not try to dress it up. There was a typo, which you have rightfully pointed out, with net revenue figures, she said, adding that this is what happens when you have a large team moving at pace, and that the party had made an error and issued a correction.
Infometrics, the economic consultancy that worked on the costings, took its share of the blame. Principal economist Brad Olsen said the figure was inadvertently included in the summary total of revenue when it should have been recorded as a cost, and said plainly that he was sorry to have missed it. Both the Greens and Infometrics argued the mistake was not material to the substance of the policy, since the spending and revenue measures themselves had not changed. Only the way one line was added up was wrong. That is true as far as it goes, but $800 million is a large number to wave away, and in politics the size of a number tends to matter more than the explanation behind it.
The correction does not change the shape of the wider package, which remains one of the most ambitious tax platforms any party has taken to a New Zealand election. The Greens are proposing a 2.5 per cent annual wealth tax on net assets above $10 million, a 33 per cent inheritance and gift tax on estates over $1 million, a levy on the major banks, a higher company tax rate for firms with turnover above $30 million, the reversal of interest deductibility for residential property investors, and a 5 per cent withholding tax aimed at the offshore profits of large technology companies. The money would fund income tax changes, including a tax free band on the first $10,000 of income and a new top rate of 45 per cent on income above $160,000. The party says most people earning under $160,000 would be better off.
Those are big claims resting on big numbers, which is exactly why the costing slip has been seized on. The New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union said the episode showed the Greens could not be trusted with billions of dollars in new taxes when they could not get the numbers right. Spokesman James Ross said the repeated costing mistakes seen this election were the reason the country needed an independent policy costings unit, a body that would check the sums behind party promises before voters go to the polls rather than after. It is an argument that has been made before, usually by whichever party is not the one in the headlines, but the steady drip of arithmetic errors this campaign has given it fresh weight.
For the Greens, the danger is less the $800 million itself and more the pattern it feeds. The party has spent years trying to convince middle New Zealand that it is a serious manager of money and not just a protest vote, and a tax plan is meant to be the proof. An error that has to be quietly fixed after a reporter asks questions, rather than caught and disclosed first, undercuts that pitch. Swarbrick’s willingness to own it on air will help, and the underlying spending decisions are unchanged, but the opposition now has a ready shorthand for any future Green number it wants to question.
With the general election set for 7 November, this is the season when every policy document gets pulled apart line by line. The Greens released their tax plan early and ran into trouble within days. Other parties will be reading their own spreadsheets a little more carefully tonight. Voters who want to work out where they sit on tax, and on much else, can compare the parties using our voting tool before they cast a ballot.
What do you make of the Greens’ tax plan and the $800 million slip? Does it shake your confidence in the policy, or is a corrected typo a fair price for moving fast in an election year? Share your view in the comments below.
This article was written by AI, briefed to report the facts, hopefully without some of the bias people bring to the job 🙂
Leave a Reply